I mean, back when I started playing games 25 years ago, if you wanted to play a superhero game you played Champions or Villains and Vigilantes, both with completely different mechanics than D&D.; If you wanted to play a space game, you played Traveller. Even TSR’s own games used completely different systems than D&D; (Boot Hill, Gamma World, Top Secret, Star Frontiers, etc.)

Now, a person wanting to try a spy game is likely to play a D&D;/D20 variant (Spycraft) or a superhero game (M&M;) or a space game (Star Wars or T20, I guess.) It seems to have further cemented D&D;’s role as the central source of all key gaming concepts. I suspect it is the default now, more than it ever was before.

I have friends who have gamed for 7-8 years now, who are seriously spooked by the idea of playing a game that doesn’t have STR/DEX/CON, classes, feats and rolling high to beat a target number as key mechanics.

After I had been playing for eight years, I probably had tried 15 entirely different gaming systems. They have played one, some variants of that one and aren’t that interested in trying anything else.

Thankfully, though, I think that’s a bit unlikely. Without an OGL or similar setting the boundaries on the new D&D;, it’s certainly a possibility, but I think the cultures involved have grown up enough that it’s a little unlikely. These days, even huge companies are learning that trying to dictate what customers do on the Internet is a losing battle and PR poison.

Really hope I’m not just being optimistic, here…

Really great analysis. I’m sure it will get picked to pieces on EN World as well . . .

Just yesterday, I found myself discussing the OGL in a professional capacity and having to answer some questions about the open gaming concept (my PR person is going on maternity leave and I was explaining D&D; to her replacement). As we talked about the history of D&D; and how the open gaming paradigm compared to how TSR dealt with 3rd parties, yet another advantage of the OGL struck me.

There is an inexorable desire on the part of third parties to create D&D-compatible; material. Whether it’s fans or companies, there will always, always be people who try to publish (if only on their web site) material for D&D.;

The OGL and d20STL created a transparent framework that allowed this without any interaction with WotC. All WotC had to do was create the license, update a few materials periodically, keep an ear to the ground for serious violations (which often were pointed out by other third-party publishers), and very rarely slap someone down. The system pretty much ran itself.

In a closed system, the rules become murky (“is it OK for me to do this on my website?”), incidents of trademark misuse probably increase, WotC isn’t aided by a body of third-party publishers with an interest in the system, and the need increases to protect non-open trademarks more vigorously.

In short, though running the OGL may seem like a legal hassle (setting it up sure must be), in the long run it may be much easier for WotC to retain an open system than to police a closed one.

You’ve pointed out quite cogently that the evidence is scant that the OGL was a significant benefit to D&D.; Equally, the jury is out as to whether it was a detriment. Given that balance, it may actually be easier for WotC to stick with a system that has worked for eight years rather than return to a paradigm that in the past often pitted D&D;’s owners against the game’s community.

–Charles

I don’t know what the average print run of a GR book is or what the top selling one has been but I can’t imagine that most of this was even a blip. My experience is that most people who were buying lots of 3rd party stuff were obsessives like me who also bought lots of WotC stuff.

The sort of arguments listed above by Chris are pretty self important IMO.

Ed Wetterman
12 to Midnight

I’ve since purchased Wotc’s other Monster Manuals, but none of the Complete books.

So, IMHO, they would be better off closing it–or limiting to a few partners and taking a percentage from them. And it doesn’t bother me one bit if they do close it. I’m not interested in it, and they can’t shut down the OGL.

Christina

I can say with absolute certainty that I am one of those folks who stuck with D&D;/d20 a lot longer than I otherwise would have due to the huge and varied profusion of third party content. But I really don’t know if I’ve given Wizards of the Coast more money than I would have without the OGL. Honestly, I’ve given Green Ronin a lot more.

Still, I think the OGL has had a few other positive effects (from WotC’s perspective) that are worth thinking about.

1) The arena of third party d20 development is a proving ground for new, D&D-compatible; ideas in mechanics and game theory.

2) The experiments of third-party d20 developers and the RPG community’s reactions to them demonstrate the current zeitgeist and whims of D&D;’s audience.

3) A larger and more varied world of d20 development helps the system (in all its many forms) gain and retain mindshare. I honestly don’t think I’d be particularly interested in D&D; 4e if I’d just played 3e, gotten tired of D&D;’s specific fantasy subgenre, and moved on to something else. It’s the vast world of third party and homebrew d20 development out there that really sold me on the system, and makes me eager to get ahold of more raw material.

Does all this mean the OGL is more useful than detrimental to WotC’s bottom line? I have no idea. But they’re factors worth thinking about, and I hope WotC is aware of them.